The Next 5000 Days of the Web

At the conclusion of his Frontline documentary Digital Nation, Douglas Rushkoff remarks that he loves technology, "but most of all [he] loves being able to turn it off." Frankly, that is my favorite part too. I love my laptop and I love my iPhone. Having access to the entirety of the web at any given time is fantastic and I am even willing to accept that, when I choose to access the web, Google, and practically every other site, will be watching. I understand that the openness of the web is built on this economy: "free" services are exchanged for data. This system, though not ideal, is acceptable.

Unfortunately. my tolerance for the Internet peepshow has a limit.

Having a smartphone with GPS locating services teaters on the brink of unacceptable but I am willing to compromise in return for the services I receive through my phone. Kevin Kelly's concept of the browser functioning as a portal to the vast singular entity, which is the Internet, is quite interesting and perhaps quite accurate as well. But what happens when the web begins extending its tentacles beyond the browser?

Believe it or not that time has already come. A French company, called Withings, recently release a bathroom scale, which can connect to a wireless network to share weight and fat information on the internet. It can even post the information as a tweet for all of your friends to read! Now people won't even have to look at a picture to see how overweight I am... thank god. Next there will be a bed that provides targeted ads either for condoms, based on how often it entertains visitors, or substitutes for visitors, if there is a noticeable lack of company; of course, it would also post all new developments directly to Twitter.

All sarcasm aside, as the web begins to permeate browser-less devices we are no longer peering through a oneway portal; the machine is looking right back. Kelly suggests that McLuhan had it backwards when he proposed that media is a sensory extension of human beings; instead, perhaps human beings are becoming merely an extension of the machine. It's becoming hard to escape it and harder to turn it off. The most unnerving part is Kelly's blissful smile as he ponders the possibility that every human being on the planet is like a moth flocking to the big, shiny Internet lightbulb. I love the near limitless possibilities of the web but I would sooner boycott the Internet entirely than let them take away the power button.

The Future of the Web

The future of the web is uncertain to say the least. New technologies spring up every day that change the way we interact with the web. I think the web will move in a similar direction to what was described in the article on web 3.0. The web is going to become smarter. Using a search engine involves the user sifting through a pages of search results. The new web will do this for the user by getting to know their personal tastes and making smarter more relavent suggestions. Technology that strives towards this goal is being released even now. Recently an iPhone application called Siri was released. The user speaks a request to the application, for example "I want pizza." Siri processes the request and returns a list of pizza places in the users general area with information on each restaurant, ratings, and menus. Users can refine the search simply by speaking another request which Siri takes in context of the current search. This is just the beginning of the app's potential and big companies have taken notice. Siri was just purchased by Apple which shows that the major players are beginning to look into such technology.

Illustrator Midterm

My illustration represents how large companies will edit their own Wikipedia pages and the pages for their products to cast them in the best possible light. In this sense, Wikipedia is under the control of these large corporations. It's just one more reason not to trust everything on Wikipedia.

Midterm Proposal

In the paper portion of my midterm I talked about how companies will edit the wikipedia pages for their company and products so that they are presented in the best possible light. I would like to do some kind of illustrated parodie depicting wikipedia being controlled by large corporations.

Media Transparency

In recent years, the technology behind the content available on the World Wide Web has greatly progressed. As a result of the advancement in the technology behind the Internet, the complexity and depth of the content accessible to users has skyrocketed. Web content has become an immersive, interactive, social experience; however, it remains as easy as ever for a web publisher to conceal or misrepresent his or her true identity from the average web user. Users have a right to understand the true

motives of the internet content they consume, especially in the form of social media, and companies and web publishers have a responsibility to maintain a degree

of transparency in their media.

Before considering the issue of transparency in media, it is important to understand the setting of this new frontier: Social Media. In social media the end user is deeply involved in the content and more often than not, the end user is the creator of the content. Users also interact with one another through the content they create and post in an online social setting. Nearly every high traffic, big time web site incorporates some form of social experience into its user interface. Obviously social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook epitomize social media; however, many other sites incorporate various aspects of the social networking model into their design. For example, on YouTube users respond to others’ videos through text comments, ratings, or video responses of their own. On Apple’s online store, buyers may leave feedback and ratings concerning products featured on the store. On Amazon.com buyers rate sellers according to the quality of the service received. Most blogs offer readers the ability to comment on and discuss blog articles with other readers. The list goes on.

So what is media transparency? According to a blog post by Brian Carter, “Transparency… when used in a social context, implies openness, communication, and accountability... Transparent procedures include open meetings, financial disclosure statements, the freedom of information legislation, budgetary review, audits, etc.” Ironically enough Brian’s definition of transparency comes from Wikipedia, which is at the center of the media transparency debate. In any case when applied to a social media perspective, this would mean that, for example, a blogger who is paid by a company to review one of their products should acknowledge this fact on their blog post.

Generally speaking, the importance of transparency in media is widely accepted. According to Michael Brito, we practice transparency almost universally in our offline lives. Peopl

e don’t lie because “nine times out of ten people get caught.” Why should lying online be viewed any differently than lying in person? When the question regarding the ethical responsibility concerning social media arises, it is often concerned with large corporations using questionably deceptive tactics to promote their brand or product.

Astroturfing is one of the most popular tactics being used by companies and political candidates to attract customers and voters respectively. Astroturfing is when the candidate or company secretly creates what seems on the surface to be a grassroots movement or production to attempt to gain the attention and support of the public. For example in 2006 following the release of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, a spoof

was released on YouTube called “Al Gore’s Penguin Army” ridiculing Gore and An Inconvenient Truth. It was later reported the the spoof, which on the surface seemed to be unprofessionally produced, was in fact created by the DCI Group. According to the Washington Times article, the DCI Group is a “District-based ad agency that works for Mobil Exxon Corp.” Clearly, environmental reforms are not in the best interests of the Mobil Exxon Corporation. The production and distribution of this spoof on YouTube was underhanded and lacked any sort of transparency and in the end was widely criticized by the media.

Wikipedia is another front for corporate misinformation. Wikipedia allows users to collaborate and edit wikipedia articles anonymously. There is no background check to verify a user’s credibility so literally anyone with a computer can change Wikipedia articles. As a result, it is not inconceivable to imagine a represe

ntative for a company changing said company’s wikipedia article to shed the most positive light on the company’s image. There have been accusations of this nature against many different corporations but until several years ago there was no hard evidence to prove the theory.

In a 2007 article on Wired.com, John Borland reported on the activities of Cal Tech student

Virgil Griffith. Griffith designed a search tool, which tracks the origin of IP addresses of

wikipedia editors. The tool, dubbed Wikipedia Scanner, makes use of the detail edit logs kept by Wikipedia. A Wikipedia Scanner search for technology behemoth Microsoft reveals

thousands of edits made from IP addresses which

trace back to the Microsoft Corporation. For fairness’s sake, Microsoft competitor Apple has edits numbering in the hundreds. The point being, the average wikipedia user has no way of knowing whether or not Microsoft or Apple or any other company has been tweaking its own articles in order to sway public opinion of the company and brand.

Independent bloggers also face issues regarding transparency. Questions arise regarding the ethics of receiving monetary payment, free products, or services from companies in exchange for featured blog posts. How much of the details of these transactions should bloggers be required to publicize?

Blogger Chris Brogan accepted an offer from K-Mart to receive a $500 K-Mart gift card with which he could purchase five-hundred dollars in merchandise. Following the shopping trip, Chris would write a blog post about his shopping experience at K-Mart. In his blog post Mr. Brogan was as transparent as possible; he acknowledged that K-Mart was sponsoring his trip, that he received the $500 gift card, that some of the merchandise was for his family while some was donated to charity. In spite of his transparency, many people were outraged that he accepted the offer, and as one commenter put it, he was “pimping [him]self out.” As Scott Henderson writes, Brogan’s readers were responding to what this K-Mart deal meant for his future reputation. Could his readers still trust his blog as a reliable, unbiased source of information?

Recently, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has become involved in the issue of disclosure on the web. Last year the FTC updated its guidelines regarding its Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, which “address endorsements by consumers, experts, organizations, and celebrities, as well as the disclosure of important connections between advertisers and endorsers.”


The guidelines have been adjusted to take into account the relatively new realm of social media. According to the new rules “the post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service.” Though the government is beginning to get involved with trade online, it still remains a relatively unregulated area.

The truth is a commodity valued almost universally throughout society. In our daily lives there are consequences for lying. As previously mentioned, Michael Brito said, there is no reason the same rules governing truth should not be applied to our online lives and dealings as well. Companies gain and retain customers through quality of product and trustworthiness, not through underhanded manipulation. Perhaps those tactics gain customers in the short run; however, once the strategy is made public, it may very well have the opposite effect.

Transparency in Social Media is undeniably important. The biggest problem with transparency online is that the Internet makes it incredibly easy for people to hide the identity or motives, at least from the average user. The Internet is a source of information and, like any other publication, it would be of no use if the information was unreliable or inaccurate. Unfortunately there is still a lot of grey area with regard to exactly how much transparency is necessary. These answers will come in time as the possibilities of social media are more fully explored and regulated. Bloggers will have to consider what effect paid assignments will have on their reputations within the online community. As it stands to a certain extent success in the world of Social Media is based on reputation. For example, on Amazon if a seller has a poor rating it is less likely that someone will buy from him or her. Until a clear system is developed it will remain the responsibility of the end user to determine the transparency and reliability of online media.

Illustrator

iMac

Midterm Paper

For my midterm I would like to do project #3 on transparency in media. I would especially like to focus on transparency on Wikipedia. A Cal Tech student created a data mining application, called Wikipedia Scanner, which traces the IP addresses on thousands of anonymous Wikipedia edits. In hundreds of cases the IP addresses can be traced back to the corporate headquarters of the companies described in the posts. I would like to investigate further the ethical issues of these practices and their effects on the reliability of Wikipedia.

Today many TV shows and advertisements try to look amateurish or "homegrown" to emulate what is often seen on the Web. Do you think professional prodution values will continue to drop, or do you think amateur user-generated content will get better over time? WHY??

Image via Wikipedia

Today, a new style of commercials, TV shows and movies has emerged. This style seems to be a deliberate effort to relate to the new aspects of Web 2.0. The Web 2.0 revolves around user-generated content. Users can easily create and upload their own web blogs, web cam videos, pictures, articles, music, music videos, and all sorts of media. They have gained a personal connection with the web because of their involvement. Hence, a new style in commercials, TV shows and movies which involves these Web 2.0 aspects is now being used by some professionals to make their content more relatable to the audience.

An example of this style is used for Windows' recent "I'm a PC" commercials. Not only does it personalize PCs with the "I am a PC" slogan, but it also connects to modern consumers by appealing to the user-generated style commonly used on the web. Another example would be the movies My Suicide, which revolves around the use of a personal webcam and the whole concept that even an amateur can produce something for a large audience to view. However, My Suicide does not appear as a low-quality or amateur-level film; it also contains high-quality editing and advanced techniques.

This specific style will continue to be used by some professional commercials, TV shows and movies so long as this Web 2.0 craze remains a dominant component of our culture. However, it will only remain one of many professional styles; the overall quality and approach of all commercials, TV shows and movies will not lower. In fact, they may become even more high-tech, high-quality and professional as more and more high-tech software and technology are developed, and more people are educated on how to use them. This increase in quality and professionalism will most likely carry over to user-generated content on the web as well. As more and more high-tech software and technology are developed, and more people are educated on how to use them, the quality of user-generated content on the web will increase.

Find a news article and write down tags you would use to define what the article is about. Now goto Digg or another tagging site and see how others have tagged it. What did you learn from the differences or similarities in tagging?

Article: Seesmic's Web App Now Does Threaded Twitter Conversations
Possible tags: Twitter, Seesmic, web applications, internet, web, social media, new
Given tags: Seesmic, software, trending, twitter, twitter client, web application

They both contain key words. However, the given tags tend to be more specific than the ones we thought of when simply skimming the article. In hindsight, a tag like "internet" probably wouldn't be included because it is assumed that if a person is interested in Twitter, then he or she probably understands that Twitter is an online service.

Why is transparency such an important concept in the Social Media world? Is it MORE or LESS important in the offline world? Why?

The issue of transparency is important in the social media world because it is easy and convenient to lie with the anonymity of the internet. If a writer wants to be taken as a credible source of information, readers have to know if they have alternative motives.

Transparency is more important in the online world than the offline world. When people are using the internet, they generally are using it as a resource for information in some way. This is different than offline media. For example, when people are watching commercials, they already understand that the intention is to advertise. When reading a blog post, though, the reader is more inclined to assume that the writer is being objective to a certain extent. It's just more clear to identify purpose in offline media rather than online media. Expecting a sales-pitch versus expecting general information will cause variation in one's ability to sense transparency: one is more susceptible to the dangers of transparency online rather than offline.

The Persuaders

The Persuaders begins by questioning the increase in the amount of advertising we typically encounter in our daily lives. How would you assess the amount of advertising you see? Too much? Too little? Just right? In your view, what difference does it make to know that people today see much more advertising in their daily lives than people 20 or 30 years ago?

I think that I see a very large amount of advertising on a daily basis. There is too much but I think that, because there is so much, we tend to not even notice it's presence in many cases. It makes sense that people today are exposed to much more advertising than they were 20 or 30 years ago. Today companies have a large number of more potent advertising resources at their disposal. 30 years ago they were limited to tv, radio, and traditional signs and newspapers. The Internet has given ad companies a near unlimited medium through which they can reach their potential customers. I think that the internet is the worst in terms of the sheer quantity of advertisements. Nearly every website online has some form of advertisement on the side. The Internet also enables companies to target their ads to a specific audience. For example, anytime I do a Google search I receive a list of "Sponsored Links" in addition to my actual search results. Those links are based off of my search and previous searches. I think, for the most part, there are some many ads online that they often are just ignored. I tune them out in a way.

Where are things headed in the future? What are some possible scenarios that could play out as far as the direction that future persuaders may take their marketing techniques?

I think that in the future we can expect to see even more targeted advertising like we see on sites like Facebook and Google but in other contexts as well.

Image via Wikipedia

I think that as televisions become more connected to the internet, viewers can expect to see commercials targeted specifically towards them while they watch tv. The Persuaders discusses how television and marketing companies are worried about how to advertise because fewer and fewer viewers are actually watching the commercials, as DVRs allow them to fast forward through the commercials and people begin video streaming off of sites like Hulu or buying tv episodes from services such as Apple's iTunes Store. As more and more advanced information technology systems find their way into every aspect of our lives the opportunities for ad companies to target individual users will grow exponentially.

Digital Nation Part II

In the second poration of Digital Nation dealt more with the issue of video games and their effect on children. They interviewed a boy from Asia who attended a computer addiction class because his mother worried about him playing games for 8 hours a day. He said that while he was there all he could think about was getting back to the game.

The documentary also took a look at technology from a more positive stand point. They interviewed teachers at schools who have integrated state of the art technology into their classrooms. One principal manage to completely turn around the academic performance in his middle school in New York City by giving every student a laptop to be integrated into every part of their education. Of course the argument can still be made that giving kids laptops in class only reinforces the multitasking which emerging research suggests negatively impacts their academic abilities.

Personally, I feel that technology should play a large part in education. Technology is a huge part of modern life and I think it would be a mistake to exclude it from education. I do, however, think that there are things which cannot be properly taught on the computer. It cannot do everything. At least for me, something like reading can never be the same on a computer. I also don't think that an online class can take the place of physically being in the classroom with the teacher.

I think that one thing Digital Nation is how social media has affected our privacy. It is very easy to find information on someone on the Internet. That can be good and bad.

The information might be there for someone who you don't want to have it. There are countless stories about people getting fired or facing negative consequences from information posted on their facebook profiles.

At the closing of Digital Nation, Douglas Rushkoff said that his favorite part of technology is that he is able to turn it off. I think I have to agree with him on that count. As much as I love having my cell phone and my laptop there are times when you just need to turn them off.

Digital Nation

So far Digital Nation has focused on our complete immersion in technology and electronic multitasking, which has become so prevalent among college students. Students are constantly connected all the time. They study while texting, listening to music, checking email, browsing Facebook, etc. Many of the students are convinced that they are good multitaskers, but a study at Stanford University has so far that this is not the case.

Personally, I would like to think that I don't multitask that much. I may not be the worst, but even now I'm writing a blog post, listening to Pandora, texting two friends, and it's quite probable that within the next three minutes I will check my email. There's almost no escaping it. I think I do about 75% of my schoolwork on the computer and when I'm on the computer there are any number of distractions.

The documentary seems to be leaning towards video games next. I know that in some Asian countries the governments recognize video game addiction as national epidemics. I can't see video games as as much of a problem though because turning on an xbox is a conscious choice where as receiving a text is not. Yes I could shut my phone off entirely, but that kind of defeats the purpose of having it right?

I think the most important issue with the rapid expansion of social media is its public nature. My online life is there for all to see. I don't see any reason to post a tweet every three minutes to let all of my followers know that I've moved from sitting on my bed reading to sitting at my desk also reading. I like to have at least some semblance of privacy but many people seem to have no reservations about sharing their lives online. I hope Digital Nation discusses the possible consequences of the open nature of social media.

Web 2.0 Terms

user-generated content: This term refers to different kinds of media, which are produces by the end-use; for example, on YouTube.com users post their own videos.

long tail: This is a retail concept of selling a large number of unique items in relatively small quantities, as opposed to a large quantity of only popular items

network as the platform: The concept of moving features normally run on the operating system to the network where they can be access quickly from anywhere.

folksonomy: A system of classification which comes from the use of collaborative tagging to to annotate and categorize content.

syndication: A method of making website material available on many other sites. The most common form of syndication is RSS feeds.

mass collaboration: This action results from large groups of people working independently of one another on a single project (i.e. wiki technology).

computer supported collaboration: Technology that effects affects groups, organizations, communities and societies such as text messaging or social networking.

hosted services: Services like Google's Gmail or Google Docs, which are "hosted" on Google's servers but may be accessed by users from anywhere in the world.

web applications: Any application which is accessed online through a web browser as opposed to an application that runs on the operating system.

social software: Any software systems which allow users to interact and share data from social networking sites like Facebook to online auctions from eBay.

video-sharing sites: Websites like YouTube.com which allow users to upload and share their own digital video content with other users of the site.

wikis: This is a website which allows users to easily and collaboratively edit and produce online content via a web browser (i.e. Wikipedia.org).

blogs: A blog is a website, usually maintained by an individual, to articles, commentary or other forms of media are regularly posted to be viewed by other users.

mashup: Digital media which takes preexisting content from other sources and compiles it together to convey a new or modified meaning.

Final McLuhan Collage

The iPhone:

The iPhone bring near limitless content into the palm of the users hand. Phone calls, emails, Facebook, music, video, and the Internet are just the start. The iPhone, and other similar devices, have changed the way everyday people communicate by giving them access to content which they were previously only able to acces from their home computers. Now they have access to that information anywhere in the world. The collage represents how the iPhone has broke down some of the boundaries of geography and time, bring users content anywhere in the world in the form of thousands of applications.

McLuhan Collage

The iPhone:

Communications Mediums

1. The Amazon Kindle

Content on the Kinlde includes text, and images in black and white. It brings electronic books to the user wirelessly anywhere within a cellular network. It is a greener alternative, saving potentially hundreds of pages of paper. EBooks will also significantly change the publishing industry as it moves from paper publications to electronic ones.

2. The iPhone

Content on the iPhone includes everything from text, audio, and video to games and images. It is basically a computer in your pocket. It breaks down the space/time barrier even further by bringing information that users could only access from a home computer into the palm of their hand anywhere in the world, such as email and webpages.

3. Facebook

Content on Facebook includes text, images, audio, and video. It changes the way people interact socially. People anywhere in the world can leave each other messages to be read at any time. On the other hand, Facebook users have a less private experience, putting information about themselves out on the web for people to see.